Stephen Elliott
Posts: 1776
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
| Quote (bjray @ April 24 2010,14:44) | ...
I can show how evolution has gotten at least two things wrong. 1) Name for me anything that you (or anyone) has ever seen actually evolve from one species to another? (Now you say, we haven't, it takes millions/billions of years for anything to evolve.) 2) Carbon dating. Accurate only to a few thousand years, as scientists have calculated. So, when said dinosaur bones were carbon dated and not linked to the millions of years evolutionists preconceived, eh, throw out the carbon dating; doesn't fit our theory.
So, we're caught in this inability to directly prove either. But evolution can be disproved. Creationism then is only "disproved" because it doesn't fit into the mold of evolution and materialism. |
Evolutionary theory explains and predicts many things.
Ring species.
Bacterial resistance to antibiotics and especially why you absolutely should take the entire course, not just stop when the symptoms are reduced.
Co-dependant species.
Where to look for fossil evidence. To name just a few. What has ID ever done that is remotely compatable?
Why do you harp on about evolution so? I am betting that you think it is wrong because somebody has told you (evidence-free) that it is wrong. There is no-way that you have honestly studied evolutionary theory, understood what it has to say and then come to the conclusion that it is wrong.
| Quote | 1)You use harsh language about how ID'ers show poor evidence, ID'ers cannot stand up to real biology, ID'ers promote god-of-the-gaps arguments, ID'ers..you know what you say. But you, yourself, said that "science is based on evidence that stands up to everything." Are you telling me that evolution has passed this test? I'm not telling you that God's actions in science/creation (what have you) can be fully explained. (Ie: now you accuse me of OH "god-of-the-gaps" right there...) It would seem to me that evolution does not stand to every "evidence" it provides. 2)Furthermore, evolution has attempted to attribute cause to creation, of which Darwin never intended to do (as noted by Sledgehammer). 3)One cannot provide evidence for some "big bang" or "primordial soup" or whatever the new story is this time around. So I submit to you that evolution also fails in many areas.
|
To my boldings.
1)Name me any evidence for ID please. The harsh language is because the ID movement is a very dishonest attack on genuine science.
2)What does that mean?
3)The big bang model is in the realms of astronomy/cosmology and absolutely nothing to do with bilogical evolution. The evidence for the big bang includes the red-shift in the light received from distant galaxies. Primordial soup is in the realms of the origin of life not evolution. It is related but a different subject.
|
